Steam News
has word on new updates for Counter-Strike: Source, Half-Life 2, and the Source
engine, which include the maps de_inferno and de_port for Counter-Strike:
Source, as well as all manner of changes and fixes, including changes to the lag
compensation code (hitboxes). Also,
this page (thanks
elvis) has an illustrated timeline outlining the development of de_inferno from
soup to nuts. This
later post describes a subsequent Source update for a CD key authentication
issue.

From Zeps comment I assume that their is a large number of unskilled players who use racial slurs & things of that nature to even the playing field. Like in most games those guys are probably the easiest to kill.... kill them a few times & they run and hide in an other server.

Time to see what the klan kiddies have to say. Trying my first game soon.

Its a little tactic involved. But surely not in most rounds on public servers. Its a stupid fragfest, and people start flaming you if you start to use tactics (which of course do take longer than ramboing into the enemy team and die). They dont understand that in this game you have to complete objectives, and not simply do teamdeathmatches.Even if I see games of clanwars with the best clans out there, they at least use the advantage their team has (i.e. CTs DONT rush if they have to defend bomb spots), but they also are unable to adapt quickly enough to the other teams tactic or movement and even ignore possibilities. I dont think people who play CS want an excess of tactic, and to be honest I dont think the small and tight maps allow much use of tactics.There are FAR better FPS games out there if you want tactic involved. So far the best Ive played was Operation Flashpoint. But you wont believe it, people made CS-like maps for that game too, and people like them.... someone understand that...

Nexus, it works. Like, if I say, "I hope your whole family dies in a house fire." And I continue on with a bunch of really crazy stuff, then people are just appalled that someone could hate so much, and they lose aggression. If I tell my team in team-speak that I'm going to say those things & why, then my team does not lose aggression because they're in on the joke.

It's definately psychological, but seriously, relying on racial and sexual slurs to win? If you want to go for an unsportsmanlike method that wouldn't work against decent competition, sure. There's plenty of ways to make an impression on both teams without lowering yourself to that level, which is true in plenty of sports.

12:45, I join the game. Score is CT:12, T:2. I join Ts.12:49, after a couple "what's up", "hi" statements, I ask how come we're losing.12:54, I make my bid for leader of the T group, stating that if everyone rushes with me that we will win 90% of the rounds.12:59, CT:14, T:4.1:15, CT:14, T:10.1:21, CT:15, T:15. Map ends.

It's *not* a team sport. It's a game about psychological control. I can take control of a game in many ways; becoming a leader is just one of them. The same game could have gone the same way if I explained to the terrorists how to win & then proceded to flashbang the CTs as a CT and get into verbal/typed conflicts with them. Most of the time, it doesn't even require the flashbangs. People are easily swayed by a few choice words about someone's race or sexual preference. All you have to do is find someone with a weak mind that can't handle someone calling their race a name and that person's game is yours to shape by controlling their anger. You can make them highly aggressive or unbalanced and sloppy. People are so easy to control. Counter Strike is a game of psychological control.

I still don't believe CS to be a tactical team game. Sure in one or two major clan matches back a year or 3 ago it was tactical, but only to an extent. It still boiled down to who rushed to a certain point first and who had the quickest reactions. There was no full on team tactics as there are in say R6 or SWAT4, yet people still claim there is.

I still think they should bring back some of the classic maps with no tinkering to their layout etc. cs_militia, de_docks, de_ship are just three i think should reappear in CS:S. Maybe even the totally one sided (although brilliant if you have a decent CT team) cs_assault. Ah i've had many a good 1v1 fight on there as well as clan matches. great fun.

I would agree to that ZigZang, with the right people playing CS can be quite tactical. On the other hand it can also just be a frag fest, depends on the crowd thats playing.

I personally really like the new inferno, its all new but still has the same routes and it looks awsome. I was dissapointed with the earlier conversions of some of the old CS maps becuase they were the same old shit, if I want the same old shit I'll play 1.6. I want source, I want eye candy and inferno delivers. I agree that de_port is looking like a awp hoar map, though it does look like you can aviod the snipers and flank them, time will tell eh.

Heh. Well, I'm sure that's a popular opinion, but it really depends on what experiences you have to compare CS:S with.

I think you will agree given two teams in CS, the team that works together and communicates is going to win a much greater % of the time. I wouldn't compare CS to Rainbow Six (etc.) but then again, look at how many people play that today compared to CS (near zippo). I think most people who play CS regularly would agree CS is alot more than simple team deathmatch.

Definitely something severe happened with the new update, because I'm hitting just about everything I go for with the M4, and I have terrible aim. Also, and maybe I only just noticed today, but when you spectate others in first person, their aim will be anywhere but on the guy they killed. Could be the lag compensation, which I hope they gradually ease up on with so many players on more than capable connections. Do we really need so much compensation when most of the people you're against have sub-100, and sometimes sub-50 pings?

Its also a game where teamwork really matters and voice chat adds a great deal

Heh. Well, I'm sure that's a popular opinion, but it really depends on what experiences you have to compare CS:S with. For me, it amounts to nothing more than team deathmatch with a 'realism' element. A fun, simple game. Nothing more or less.

I agree Zigzang. I also think CS has some sort of crack rock in the net code. I think we've all had the "god like" and the can't hit sh!t nights. Something in the net code gives you just enough satisifaction to keep you coming back for more. I also think this leads to the "OMFG H4x0rz!" attitude prevelant in most CS players.

I should check out this coutner strike thing since I got it free with HL2. I've heard so many bad comments about CS that I've never even tried or seen the original..well maybe on tech TV a few times but that's it.

I think (one of) the main reasons some complain about CS is the fact that so many people play it. IMO, CS:S is a great game, simple to learn and difficult to master. If you've not played it you owe it to yourself to try it . . . learning the weapons, maps, strategies on both sides can be alot of fun. Its also a game where teamwork really matters and voice chat adds a great deal to the experience. Don't be fooled by some of the vocal critics, CS is a classic squad-based, FPS multiplayer game.

I should check out this coutner strike thing since I got it free with HL2. I've heard so many bad comments about CS that I've never even tried or seen the original..well maybe on tech TV a few times but that's it.